Share This Story!

EDITORIAL: Fight PennEast on all fronts

Soon, PennEast pipeline developers will be able to force themselves onto land to which they have been denied access in pursuit of a proposed 120-mile natural gas line from Luzerne County, Pennsylvania cutting across Hunterdon County all the way to Mercer County. It is, therefore, becoming that much more urgent that state officials do what they can to block the unneeded and environmentally hazardous project.

In an action of protest and solidarity with Climate Marchers around the world, nearly 100 residents of Bucks County, Pennsylvania, and Hunterdon County marched in April to protest the Trump administration’s environmental policies and the proposed PennEast pipeline.(Photo: File photo)Buy Photo

Soon, PennEast pipeline developers will be able to force themselves onto land to which they have been denied access in pursuit of a proposed 120-mile natural gas line from Luzerne County, Pennsylvania cutting across Hunterdon County all the way to Mercer County.

It is, therefore, becoming that much more urgent that state officials do what they can to block the unneeded and environmentally hazardous project. It remains unclear, however, whether there’s sufficient will to do so, despite overwhelming public opposition.

Supporters say the PennEast pipeline will create valuable additional capacity reducing energy costs for residents. It’s the same pitch we’ve heard for a succession of pipeline proposals across the state, a pitch that grows more dubious with every repetition. There’s little reason to believe each of these projects will meaningfully benefit New Jerseyans regardless of how many are built. At some point gains would be incremental at best, with companies competing for the same resources rather than increasing supply. But the approval process lacks proper consideration of the full scope of proposals and how to prioritize them.

Opponents have held up the PennEast project to some degree by keeping developers off their land along the proposed route, preventing collection of data on wetlands and other environmentally sensitive elements. As a result, PennEast has been unable to obtain some necessary permits.

That could change, however, once the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) grants PennEast power of eminent domain. FERC has been stalled by a pair of vacancies on the panel, but recent nominations by President Trump may soon clear away that obstacle.

Project opponents held a press conference last week again urging the state Department of Environmental Protection to withhold state-level permits because of incomplete information from PennEast. That has been a common complaint about the project to date, even as PennEast claims it’s all a routine part of the application process. A legal challenge over potential conflicts between federal and state laws may also be in the works.

We’ll simply reinforce what we’ve said all along; this project, like many other pipeline proposals, should be contested at every turn. We certainly don’t need all of them, and may not need any of them. The PennEast pipeline is particularly problematic because of the many environmentally sensitive areas it would cross, including under the Delaware River. The risks are significant, and there’s no greater public good involved that somehow outweighs the danger or should override public resistance.

New techniques for tapping into vast natural gas supplies in Pennsylvania’s Marcellus Shale have prompted the pipeline proliferation — techniques that themselves raise environmental concerns. Hydraulic fracturing — fracking — involves injecting a high-pressure mix of water and chemicals deep underground, threatening water supplies and even potentially triggering small earthquakes.

Some environmentalists balk at any initiative supporting use of fossil fuels. But these pipeline plans deserve to be opposed independent of green-energy concerns. If officials won’t take a comprehensive approach to assessing the array of pipeline projects plaguing New Jersey, we should fight them all.